SLelner's Lypology of group Lasks argued LhaL group effecLlveness depends on Lhe 1ask Lhe

group ls aLLempLlng Lask demands are deflned by Lask dlvlslblllLy (Jlvlslble Lasks versus
ooltoty Lasks) Lhe Lype of ouLpuL deslred (moxlmlzloq tosks versus optlmlzloq tosks) and Lhe
soclal comblnaLlon rule used Lo comblne lndlvldual members' lnpuL
roup ouLperform lndlvldual on oJJltlve tosks and compeosototy tosks alLon
conflrmed Lhe wlsdom of Lhe crowd" by flndlng LhaL lndependenL lndlvlduals'
[udgemenLs when averaged LogeLher Lend Lo be hlghly accuraLe
roups perform well ln Jlsjooctlve tosks lf Lhe group lncludes aLleasL one lndlvldual
who knows Lhe soluLlon 1he truthw|ns ru|e usually holds for groups worklng on
eureka problems whereas Lhe ttotbsoppotteJwlos rule holds for groups worklng
on non eureka problems
roups are more effecLlve declslon makers Lhan lndlvlduals parLlcularly when
deallng wlLh problems LhaL have a known soluLlon (lotellectlve tosks) raLher Lhan
problems LhaL have no clear rlghL or wrong answers (joJqemeotol tosks)
roups perform poorly on coojooctlve tosks unless Lhe Lask can be subdlvlded lnLo
subLasks maLched Lo members' ablllLles ln some cases Lhe koblet effect occurs Lhe
pooresL performlng members lncrease Lhelr producLlvlLy due Lo compeLlLlve sLrlvlngs
and Lhe recognlLlon LhaL Lhelr poor performance ls holdlng Lhe group back from
success
1he effecLlveness of group worklng on Jlsctetloooty tosks covarles wlLh Lhe meLhod
chosen Lo comblne lndlvlduals' lnpuL
5ootce
hLLp//booksgooglecoln/books?ld8sMnlobZo[lCpgA311lpgA311dqsoclal+comblnaL
lon+(SLelners+Lask+Lheory)sourcebloLsllkwz2SCslgZ1Zk38x4lvxunxcnfu1LwhpL16o
hleneluWa31uq0CMLZrCfLor3pAwsaxolbook_resulLcLresulLresnum3sql2v
ed0CucC6ALwAg#vonepageqsoclal20comblnaLlon20(SLelners20Lask20Lheory)ffa
lse

8esearch on soclal comblnaLlon models of group problem solvlng and declslon maklng
lndlcaLes LhaL Lhe number of group members LhaL ls necessary and sufflclenL for a collecLlve
declslon ls lnversely proporLlonal Lo Lhe demonsLrablllLy of a proposed group response
MaLhemaLlcs ls Lhe preemenenL domaln of demonsLrablllLy Accordlngly f truth w|ns soc|f|
comb|nft|on process ln whlch a slngle correcL group member ls necessary and sufflclenL for
a correcL group response was predlcLed for flveperson groups on 10 maLhemaLlcal
problems AfLer Laklng Lhe problems as lndlvlduals college sLudenLs Look Lhem agaln as flve
person groups or conLrol lndlvlduals 1hey Lhen Look Lhe same problems a Lhlrd Llme as
lndlvlduals roups performed beLLer Lhan lndlvlduals on Lhe second admlnlsLraLlon and
lndlvlduals who had been ln groups performed beLLer on Lhe Lhlrd admlnlsLraLlon Lhan
lndlvlduals who had noL been ln groups As predlcLed Lhe besLflLLlng soclal comblnaLlon
model was LruLh wlns We propose LhaL demonsLrablllLy requlres four condlLlons and LhaL
Lhe soclal comblnaLlon process on a glven Lask corresponds Lo Lhe degree Lo whlch Lhese
four condlLlons are fulfllled
Soclal comblnaLlon analyses and sequenLlal LranslLlon analyses lndlcaLed LhaL Lhe groups
were remarkably able Lo recognlze and adopL Lhe correcL hypoLhesls lf and only lf lL was
proposed by aL leasL 1 group member on some Lrlal